Subject: Re: [lojban] An approach to attitudinals

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 15:03:51 EDT

In a message dated 6/13/2001 12:39:20 AM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> E. An attitudinal attached to a sumti does not assert the sentence to be
> true IF the attitudinal is not:
> 

Attitudinals DO NOT ASSERT anything, so cannot be true or false. This "rule" 
does not make sense. 

<F. An attitudinal attached to the selbri implies that the bridi is true but
doesn't actually assert it.>
Since attitudinals don't assert anyhting, they don't strictly imply anything 
either (maybe only a terminological problem?)

And so on. This seem essentially to do away with attitudinals as such and 
replace them with only assertions about my mental states.